There are numerous ways to improve your browser experience if you're somehow still using Internet Explorer. You can download a modern browser with proper standards support, like Firefox or Chrome, but there are numerous scenarios where this isn't possible. One of those is in corporate scenarios, where a lot of people still rely on Internet Explorer. A solution here is Google's Chrome Frame, which just went into beta.

Wouldn't any IT department worth their pay have just as much of an issue with a browser plugin as they would with another browser in general? Given the security risk plugins can pose, as well as the fact that this is just basically another browser within IE anyway, the IT department should subject it to the same criteria.

I don't get it. If you can install the plugin then you can install Chrome. Where's the use for this plugin?

The advantage that the plugin has is that it allows Google to offer something to people via a method they already understand and are not afraid of (even though they should be!)

Now a website, instead of displaying a message to the effect of: "You need to upgrade your browser", can offer the plugin instead. Idiot users are already happy to download any plugin that is required to see a website (i.e. Flash, Java, Adobe Reader, Nefarious Video Porn Viewer Plugin, etc) - and will do so.

If confronted with the requirement that they install and use a different browser, they less likely to visit this website - and the website developer knows this. Therefore, not offering such an easy solution for website developers will discourage upgrading their website to support HTML5/CSS3 features.

This plugin is a crutch to encourage web developers to improve their websites knowing that they're providing an easier alternative for crappy idiot users to view them.

Now a website, instead of displaying a message to the effect of: "You need to upgrade your browser", can offer the plugin instead. Idiot users are already happy to download any plugin that is required to see a website (i.e. Flash, Java, Adobe Reader, etc) - and will do so.

Spot on. Exactly. Precisely so.

After a while, Google may well move YouTube entirely over to VP8. They will now have two options to offer to visitors using IE ... either install this Google Chrome Frame plugin, or update their Flash plugin.

The latter is an option because Adobe are a supporter of VP8, and have agreed to make Flash support either VP8 or H.264 encoded videos.

A visitor to YouTube using IE will see a popup asking either to update the Flash plugin, or install the Google Chrome Frame plugin. After either of those, YouTube will work for that IE user in VP8 videos.

This means that at least Google/YouTube can escape from under the control of the MPEG LA consortium, and as a bonus they no longer have to pay MPEG LA royalties.

Eventually, even Adobe might be able to do the same, by removing H.264 support from their Flash player. Alternatively, Adobe might off two variants of their Flash plugin, one with support for H.264 as well as VP8, and the other with support for only VP8. The latter would cost Adobe nothing to distribute, and they might even make this version open source.

PS: as for needing admin rights to install Google Chrome Frame as a plugin for IE, possibly only YouTube users would even want to install Google Chrome Frame to start with. That is OK, since they have already installed Adobe Flash (in order to be YouTube users in the first place), so they should have no trouble installing Google Chrome Frame.

This plugin is a crutch to encourage web developers to improve their websites knowing that they're providing an easier alternative

If YouTube moves over to VP8, and if a significant number of users subsequently start to install Google Chrome Frame, then we could see a snowball effect. More and more websites could use HTML5/Webm/Canvas/SVG/Javascript to achieve advanced features for the website, telling their IE visitors that to view the site they would need Googel Chrome Frame.

If we get such a snowball effect, Mircrosoft and Apple would have finally lost their restraining control over the web.

I’m system engineer in a company with about 1500 employees and I see at least one scenario where this plug-in could be really helpful.

We make heavily use of web applications (with a lot of java scripting and Ajax). Performances of these applications under IE7 are really bad, with IE8 it’s just acceptable and it doesn’t work at all with IE6. We had to install Firefox on our computers and deal with 2 installed browsers (GPO sets, etc etc etc). We also have a web app that works ONLY under IE. We have every day calls from user that use the right app on the wrong browser (even after years of usage).

A plug-in like this, as long as it can be installed silently (through scripts or GPO), could have avoided a dual browser install that is complicated for some users… They confuse the browser and the webapp that runs through it (incredible but true :-( ).

Administrator rights for users would not be relevant as the plug-in would be deployed by us (and we are the admins)

Last interesting point is that IE can be configured on every single aspect through enterprise policies, that’s not possible (limited or impossible) with other installed browsers.